Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Real Estate
Reply to "Cities with No Children"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous] ITA. There is plenty of affordable housing in parts of DC that yuppies don't want to live in. [/quote] And if yuppies go there (some already are, of course - yes, EOTR) that will push out the current low income residents. More gentrification is not the answer to making housing more affordable. [/quote] What is your suggestion for lower income residents? Are you saying we should build public housing in large quantity, which would [b]naturally[/b] be concentrated in lower cost parts? Do you suggest we should give incentive to market rate landlords or developers to build at a loss/rent at a loss or somehow motivate them to be more self-sacrificing? NYC had not solved this problem despite insane rate of new construction and incredible density and zoning laws. The poor also get pushed out into more distant or more unsafe parts due to gentrification there. The only way to make housing more affordable is to make someone pay for it, simple as that. Who will pay for it? Solve this problem and get back to us. [/quote] "Naturally"? If government-sponsored housing is concentrated in lower-cost parts, it's because the government made a deliberate decision for that to happen.[/quote] Land costs less in cheaper parts. To build cheap housing you need cheap land, what's unnatural about this?[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics